National Assessment Governing Board Executive Committee

November 19, 2015 4:30-6:00 pm

AGENDA

4:30 – 4:35 pm Welcome and Agenda Overview Terry Mazany, Chair

4:35 – 4:45 pm Plans for 2017 Trial Urban District Assessment Bill Bushaw, Executive Director

Attachment A

4:45 – 4:55 pm Governing Board Updates: Funding Resolution

Bill Bushaw, Executive Director Congressional Activity

Lily Clark, Assistant Director for Policy and Research 2017 Board Meeting Locations

Mary Crovo, Deputy Executive Director

Attachment B

4:55 – 5:10 pm Strategic Planning Initiative Lucille Davy, Vice Chair

Attachment C

5:10 – 5:15 pm Nominations Committee Update Tonya Miles, Chair

5:15 – 6:00 pm Closed Session: 5:15-6:00 pm NAEP Budget and Assessment Schedule

Terry Mazany, Chair Bill Bushaw, Executive Director Peggy Carr, Acting Commissioner, NCES

Attachment D

Attachment A

Timeline and Activities to

Identify Participating Districts for the 2017 TUDA

Timeline Activity

April 2015 Governing Board staff discuss the 2017 assessment schedule and eligible districts for TUDA with Council of the Great City Schools (CGCS) and NCES.

May 2015 Board Meeting

Governing Board staff brief Executive Committee on the timeline and process for determining TUDA participants for 2017.

August 2015 Board Meeting

Executive Committee discusses the number of districts to participate in TUDA.

August 2015 CGCS consults with current TUDA participants to assess informally their interest in participating in the 2017 assessments. Eligible districts may be notified of the opportunity to apply to volunteer for slots in the event of current TUDA participants declining or expansion of the program due to additional funding from Congress.

October 2015 Governing Board staff send notification letters to continuing districts.

Fall 2015 Governing Board staff, in consultation with CGCS, obtain the commitment from continuing volunteer districts to participate.

November 2015 Board Meeting

Governing Board determines TUDA participants for 2017.

January 2016 Governing Board staff provide acknowledgement letters to participants in the 2017 TUDA and notify NCES.

2

Attachment A

List of Eligible Districts for 2017 Trial Urban District Assessments (TUDA)

Districts Participating in the 2015 TUDA 1) Albuquerque Public Schools (NM)2) Atlanta Public Schools (GA)3) Austin Independent School District (TX)4) Baltimore City Public Schools (MD)5) Boston Public Schools (MA)6) Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools (NC)7) Chicago Public Schools (IL)8) Cleveland Metropolitan School District (OH)9) Dallas Independent School District (TX)10) Detroit Public Schools (MI)11) District of Columbia Public Schools (DC)12) Duval County Public Schools (Jacksonville, FL)13) Fresno Unified School District (CA)14) Hillsborough County Public Schools (FL)15) Houston Independent School District (TX)16) Jefferson County Public Schools (KY)17) Los Angeles Unified School District (CA)18) Miami-Dade County Public Schools (FL)19) New York City Public Schools (NY)20) School District of Philadelphia (PA)21) San Diego Unified School District (CA)

Additional Districts Eligible for Participation in the 2017 TUDA (pending an open slot created by a district declining to continue participating in TUDA or additional NAEP funding)

1) Arlington Independent School District (TX)2) Clark County School District (NV)3) Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District (TX)4) Davidson County Schools (including Nashville, TN)5) Denver Public Schools (CO)6) El Paso Independent School District (TX)7) Elk Grove Unified School District (CA)8) Fort Bend Independent School District (TX)9) Fort Worth Independent School District (TX)10) Guilford County Schools (including Greensboro, NC)11) Katy Independent School District (TX)12) Long Beach Unified School District (CA)13) Mesa Public School (AZ)14) Milwaukee Public Schools (WI)15) North East Independent School District (TX)16) Northside Independent School District (TX)17) Shelby County Schools (including Memphis, TN)

3

Albuquerque

Dallas

Hillsborough County (FL)

2011, 2013(21)

2015(21)

Detroit

PhiladelphiaBaltimore City

Fresno Jefferson County (KY)

Miami-Dade

2009(18)

Austin

2005, 2007(11)

Boston

Cleveland

Charlotte

San Diego

2003(10)

New York CityChicago

District of Columbia (DCPS)

Los AngelesAtlanta

Houston

2002(6)

Duval County

Symbols indicate the first year each district participated in TUDA.This map does not include Milwaukee Public Schools, which participated in 2011 and 2013, but declined to participate in the 2015 TUDA.

Map of Districts Participating in the 2015 Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA)Attachment A - TUDA Map

4

National Assessment Governing Board

Resolution on the Imperative for Increased NAEP Funding

Whereas, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)—also known as The

Nation’s Report Card—is authorized by Congress and is the largest nationally representative and

continuing assessment of what our nation’s elementary and secondary students know and can do;

Whereas, since 1969, NAEP has been the country’s foremost resource for measuring student

progress and identifying differences in student achievement across various student subgroups;

Whereas, in a time of ever-changing state standards and assessments, the need for NAEP as the

only national measure to compare student achievement across states and select large urban

districts is greater than ever;

Whereas, the overwhelming, voluntary participation of states and select urban districts in non-

mandatory NAEP assessments is a testament to the usefulness of and demand for NAEP results;

Whereas, the nation relies on NAEP to monitor whether students are prepared with the academic

rigor, technological skills, critical thinking, and global perspectives necessary to meet the

demands of the twenty-first century through assessments in a broad range of subjects;

Whereas, NAEP must innovate to keep pace with the changing world of education and

technology by transitioning to digital-based assessments (DBA) which provide new ways to

measure student achievement that are more precise, more engaging, and better capture a wider

range of knowledge and skills than can typically be measured with paper-and pencil tests;

Whereas, it is of paramount importance to invest in technology to maintain stringent protections

to ensure consistent and fair assessment conditions with DBA by providing uniform digital

devices and uninterrupted, secure connectivity in the near-term;

Whereas, without additional resources to support the costly but necessary transition to DBA

while simultaneously maintaining its ability to report trends, NAEP will be dramatically

compromised in its ability to fulfill its mission as it will be reduced to measuring a narrower

range of subjects, testing fewer grade levels, and administering fewer assessments at the state

level;

Therefore, the National Assessment Governing Board resolves that timely and

significant increases of funds are necessary to ensure that The Nation’s Report

Card continues to provide policymakers, parents, principals, teachers, and

researchers with the nation’s only continuous and objective measure of student

progress in a wide range of subjects and grades at the national, state, and select

large urban district levels, capturing the full scope of academic rigor,

technological proficiency, critical thinking, and global perspectives necessary for

success in the twenty-first century.

Approved Unanimously: August 8, 2105

Attachment B

5

2015-2017 Quarterly Board Meeting Dates and Locations

MEETING DATES LOCATION

2015-2016

November 19-21, 2015 Westin Crystal City 1800 Jefferson Davis Highway Arlington, VA 22202 (703) 486-1111

March 3-5, 2016 Washington DC

May 12-14, 2016 Washington DC

August 4-6, 2016 Sofitel Hotel Chicago Water Tower 20 E. Chestnut Street Chicago, IL 60611 (312) 324-4000

November 17-19, 2016 Washington, DC

2017

March 2-4, 2017 TBD

May 18-20, 2017 TBD

August 3-5, 2017 TBD

November 16-18, 2017 Washington, DC

*The Governing Board meets four times a year. Members can access materials for eachmeeting via the secure site and on the public site at http://www.nagb.gov/what-we-do/quarterly-board-meeting-materials.html on each Friday of the Quarterly Board meeting.

Attachment B

6

SAN FRANCISCO

1993 2006

AUSTIN 1989 2005

SAN ANTONIO 2012

HOUSTON 2001*

ATLANTA 1990 2005

NASHVILLE 2007

HONOLULU 2000

BOSTON 2007 2014

DEARBORN 2006

DENVER 1994 2004

KANSAS CITY 2003

NEW ORLEANS

2002 2012

CHARLESTON 1997

PHILADELPHIA 2004

SEATTLE 1998 2009

NEW YORK CITY 1999 2008

ANN ARBOR

1999*

* Special one-day meeting

BALTIMORE 2000 2013

ANNAPOLIS 2001

ALBUQUERQUE 2008

SAN DIEGO 1991

WEST PALM BEACH

1989

FT LAUDERDALE 1992

CORAL GABLES 2001

MIAMI 2011

RALEIGH 2009

MILWAUKEE 2010

PORTLAND 2011

COLUMBUS 2015

LOS ANGELES

2013

CHICAGO 2016

Attachment B7

Governing Board Meetings Outside of Washington, DC Area 1989 – 2016

The National Assessment Governing Board’s Innovation Ambition for NAEP:

Strategic Planning Initiative Overview

Purpose of the Strategic Planning Initiative The purpose of the National Assessment Governing Board’s Strategic Planning Initiative is to take stock of the value and contributions of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) to our nation, identify opportunities to advance the Governing Board’s statutory mandate, understand and address any threats to this mission posed by changes in the external environment, and ensure that the Governing Board continues to play an important role in informing policymakers, educators, and the public about student achievement in our nation.

The Strategic Plan should consider the current Federal budget environment and strive to reallocate and redeploy existing resources in alignment with the Framework’s Strategic Priorities rather than presume appropriations increases. The Governing Board’s Strategic Planning Initiative should concentrate on objectives that can be achieved by 2020.

As much as possible, the Governing Board’s Strategic Plan should be consistent with the priorities of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in order to increase the synergy and impact of the plans to further the overall mission and objectives of NAEP.

The Strategic Plan should affirm the long-standing principles of NAEP’s curriculum independence, its status as a low stakes assessment for national, state-level, and select urban district benchmarking comparisons and analysis, and its prohibition on reporting individual student and school results, all of which are in accordance with the NAEP statute.

Process The work to develop and implement the Governing Board’s Strategic Plan for NAEP will occur in three phases, over the course of approximately six years.

Phase I – Establish Overarching Goals and Strategic Priorities (Fiscal Year (FY) 2015) Led by the Executive Committee, the Governing Board will develop the vision for its Strategic Plan, with the goal of finalizing the Strategic Planning Framework for action at the August 2015 quarterly meeting. Approval of the Strategic Planning Framework document will conclude Phase I of the NAEP Strategic Planning Initiative.

Phase II – Develop the Strategic Plan (FY 2016) With the Overarching Goals and Strategic Priorities set forth in the Framework as its guide, the Governing Board will embark on the detailed work of creating its Strategic Plan. This will include determining what activities the Governing Board should initiate, gathering external feedback from stakeholders on the Strategic Plan, pursuing additional research to inform Governing Board decisions, and determining the methods the Governing Board will use to monitor the implementation and success of the Strategic Planning Initiative. Phase II will begin in the fall of 2015 and is expected to be completed by August 2016.

Attachment C

1

8

To develop an appropriate Strategic Plan and ensure that it serves as the “North Star” for the Governing Board’s innovation ambition, the Board should consider its vast expertise and experience, which provides the foundation for this effort. While much of the Governing Board’s current efforts will dovetail with the goals and priorities identified in the Strategic Planning Framework, the Board should also reflect on whether certain activities should be modified to preserve resources for—and maintain focus on—the Governing Board’s priorities. For example:

• The Governing Board has invested a significant amount of resources into academicpreparedness research. What should the future investment in this area be, in light of theGoverning Board’s Strategic Priorities?

• The Strategic Planning Framework contemplates further work in the realm of assessmentliteracy. How would this priority build from the Board’s short term Assessment Literacycampaign into long term actions for the Board’s Standing Committees?

• Several potential priorities consider innovating through new communications approaches.How might this impact the current work of the Reporting and Dissemination Committeeand its already approved Communications Plan?

• The Framework considers messaging strategies that target parents. How would this futurework build from the Governing Board’s 2014 Parent Summit?

• The Future of NAEP initiative recommended the creation of an Innovations Laboratory todefine and drive an agenda for innovation. NCES adopted this recommendation and isinvesting in research and development to improve NAEP. How will the Governing Boardand NCES work in partnership to ensure that the NCES investments in innovation arealigned with the Governing Board’s strategic vision?

• Research Roadmap – The potential priorities and proposed related activities in theStrategic Planning Framework may require additional information before the GoverningBoard will be able to determine whether or how to implement them. The GoverningBoard should identify the “research roadmap” of desired short-term and long-terminformation needs to support the Strategic Planning Initiative.

Phase III – Implement the Strategic Plan (FY 2017 – 2020) Once the Governing Board approves the Strategic Plan, the Board will embark on the implementation phase to occur over an approximately four-year period. The initiatives identified within the Strategic Plan will primarily be conducted by the existing Standing Committees. The Executive Committee will provide leadership to the Committees regarding the course of those activities and will monitor the plan’s implementation. At each August Governing Board meeting while the Strategic Plan is in effect, the Board will assess attainment of its Strategic Priorities and Overarching Goals.

2

9

Proposed Timeline:

Phase Dates Activities

Phase I

February 8-9, 2015 Executive Committee discusses strategic planning process and priorities

March 5-7, 2015 (Board meeting)

Executive Committee discusses draft Strategic Planning Framework

Full Board discusses Strategic Priorities

May 14-16, 2015 (Board meeting)

Executive Committee discusses process and timeline

Full Board discusses draft Strategic Planning Framework

August 6-8, 2015 (Board meeting) Full Board Action on Strategic Planning Framework

Phase II

Fall 2015 – Summer 2016

Identify and implement action steps to fulfill the Board’s approved Strategic Planning Framework

Obtain input from partners (e.g. NCES) and stakeholders on the draft Strategic Plan

Begin identifying and implementing “research roadmap” needs to inform Governing Board decisions and activities

May 12-14, 2016 (Board meeting) Full Board discusses draft Strategic Plan

August 4-6, 2016 (Board meeting) Full Board Action on Strategic Plan

Phase III Annually in August

2017 – 2020 (Board meetings)

Check-up on attainment of Strategic Priorities and Overarching Goals for the duration of the Strategic Plan’s implementation

3

10

November 2015

• Board reviewsdraft activities forthe Strategic Plan

March 2016 • Board receives

findings ofexternalfeedback ondraft activities

May 2016 • Board reviews

draft StrategicPlan, includingactions andmetrics

August 2016 • Board

considersaction on theStrategic Plan

11

National Assessment Governing Board Strategic Planning Initiative

Phase II Timeline

Attachment C

1

12

The National Assessment Governing Board’s

Innovation Ambition for NAEP:

Strategic Planning Framework

Purpose of the Strategic Planning Framework The National Assessment Governing Board embarked on its Strategic Planning Initiative to

ensure that the Governing Board continues to play an important and strategic role in furthering

student achievement in our nation. This Strategic Planning Framework captures the Governing

Board’s vision for the National Assessment Educational Progress (NAEP) program, and

identifies the Overarching Goals and Strategic Priorities that the Governing Board will use to

develop and implement the Strategic Plan.

Our Mission The mission of the independent, bipartisan National Assessment Governing Board is to set policy

for NAEP. As specified in its authorizing statute, the Governing Board must identify the

subjects to be tested by NAEP, determine the content for each assessment, review all NAEP

questions, set achievement levels, and inform Congress and the American Public about the

achievement of U.S. students. To fulfill its Congressional mandate, the Governing Board must

also “take appropriate actions needed to improve the form, content, use, and reporting of results

of any assessment authorized”.1

Legacy of Innovation The Governing Board identifies assessment-related issues in public education which can be

addressed by NAEP, sets policies for NAEP which are forward-thinking and innovative in

relation to NAEP’s potential role and impact on U.S. student achievement, and collaborates with

the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) to implement the Board’s policies.

Examples of the Governing Board’s successes include:

Identifying important broad-based curriculum areas for the NAEP assessments (NAEP

has always been about more than reading and mathematics and includes a wide range of

subjects, for example, Technology and Engineering Literacy (TEL) and Economics);

Encouraging development of innovative assessment items and assessment methodology

(i.e., digital-based assessments (DBA));

Effectively communicating NAEP results in ways that enable parents, educators, and

policy makers to take action (such as by reporting results via achievement levels, making

reports accessible and easy to understand, and increasing outreach to parents); and

1 Pub. L. 107-279, §302(e)(1)(I),

Approved Unanimously: August 8, 2015

Attachment C

2

13

Focusing on important issues for U.S. education (including linking NAEP to international

assessments, conducting research on academic preparedness for college, and expanding

increased assessment literacy of NAEP stakeholders).

Power of Partnership

The Governing Board works closely with NCES to implement the NAEP program and benefits

from ideas generated from their efforts. A recent NCES initiative on The Future of NAEP2 will

be informative to the Board’s strategic planning efforts.

The Future of NAEP initiative started in 2012 when NCES convened panels of experts and state

and local stakeholders to develop a high-level vision for the future of the NAEP program, as well

as a plan for moving toward that vision. The resulting recommendations to the Commissioner of

NCES were published in the May 2012 NAEP Looking Ahead: Leading Assessment into the

Future white paper; it defined what NAEP does best as:

“Going forward, we expect that NAEP will continue to serve as the most

authoritative source of information concerning patterns and trends in the

academic achievement of American youth, and also as a model of excellence and

innovation in large-scale assessment. It will continue to serve as a trustworthy,

low-stakes benchmark test against which to judge the effectiveness of various

large-scale educational reforms. It will also evolve to measure an expanded range

of learning outcomes using new technologies.” (p.7)3

Role of the Governing Board and NAEP

An essential role of the Governing Board is to safeguard public trust in NAEP’s evaluation of

our nation’s elementary and secondary students’ academic performance. The Board sets policy to

enable NAEP to provide the long view of educational progress––spanning five decades––with

breadth and depth of coverage across subjects and content. NAEP provides our country with

information to understand the strengths, weaknesses, and trends in our decentralized system of

education. Whenever there is debate about student achievement, NAEP is relied upon as a trusted

and trustworthy source of information.

2 “The Future of NAEP” initiative, National Center for Education Statistics,

https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/future_of_naep.aspx. 3 “The Future of NAEP” white paper, National Center for Education Statistics,

https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/Future_of_NAEP_Panel_White_Paper.pdf

Attachment C

3

14

While much attention is focused on NAEP as

the gold standard, equally important is NAEP’s

innovation over time under NCES’s technical

direction. The Governing Board successfully

balances the tension inherent within the dual

goals of maintaining NAEP’s role as the most

trusted source of academic achievement of the

nation’s students over time while also

continuously improving the form and function

of NAEP to remain relevant. From its

inception, NAEP innovated on all aspects of

assessment. Examples of these innovations

include:

Technical – developing sampling

methodology; developing new types of

assessment questions and tasks;

generating analytic models; setting

achievement levels; applying item

response theory; scale anchoring;

developing constructed-response test

questions; targeting complex skills and

hands-on tasks; delivering digital-based

test questions; and pioneering scenario-

based interactive assessment tasks.

Content – measuring knowledge and

skills of youth as a group; measuring

learning progress over time; developing

new assessment frameworks and path-

breaking instruments; collecting and

analyzing contextual data; and

increasing the inclusion of individuals

with disabilities and English Language

learner populations.

Communications – reporting on student

learning in terms of specific grades;

increasing the accessibility and

usability of information through

internet-based reporting and

dissemination, which places control in

the hands of the user; and focusing on

more useful reporting on comparison

groups and with all participating

jurisdictions.

National Assessment Governing Board:

Legacy of Innovations

While the vast majority of NAEP’s

innovations have been developed

through the collaborative efforts of the

Governing Board and NCES, it is worth

noting the unique role that the

independent policy-setting Governing

Board can play in keeping NAEP at the

forefront of assessments. The

Governing Board’s legacy of

innovations includes:

Developing assessment frameworks

aimed at deeper learning;

Establishing achievement levels

(policy adopted in 1990);

Promoting the use of contextual

information about students,

teachers, and schools as it relates to

student achievement;

Emphasizing subject areas of

importance to the U.S. (e.g., Civics,

U.S. History, TEL, the Arts);

Exploring the use of NAEP as an

indicator of students’ academic

preparedness for college;

Supporting the transition from

paper-based to digital-based

assessments (DBA):

Phase I – Science interactive

computer tasks, Writing, TEL

2009-2014; and

Phase II – Reading and

Mathematics, etc. DBA for

2017 and beyond; and

Highlighting the importance of

reporting on comparative data

involving NAEP and international

assessments.

Attachment C

4

15

Thinking About the Future Success of NAEP –

Key Questions, Risks, and Opportunities The Governing Board is uniquely positioned with an authoritative voice in the national

conversations surrounding assessment. To fulfill its mission as an independent and unbiased

leader in the evolving educational landscape, the Governing Board must consider several key

questions and national trends identified below as it develops its strategic plan.

What are the major trends in education that could shape NAEP, and, in turn, how can the

Governing Board contribute to some of those trends and best respond to others?

How do we balance the roles of NAEP serving as both a mainstay of education as well as

a catalyst for improvement?

What is the innovation ambition for NAEP that will ensure NAEP remains relevant for

future generations?

What are the leadership roles the Governing Board can and should play?

The NAEP Looking Ahead white paper lists “four major trends to which NAEP must be prepared

to respond”:

1. Other assessments are likely to provide information about student achievement that

may be aggregated and compared across districts and states. NAEP’s value as an

independent, ongoing, nationally representative assessment will remain and may, in

fact, be more important than ever;

2. As we aspire to provide all of our young people with the high levels of knowledge

and skills needed in a global economy, NAEP will be called upon to assess a broader

set of learning outcomes;

3. Rapidly changing technology is driving all aspects of modern life, including learning

and assessment. NAEP should continue to serve as a leader in assessment innovation

as new technologies become available for assessment (e.g. adaptive testing), as well

as for scoring and reporting results; and

4. There is increasing interest in cross-national comparisons of educational achievement,

and in sharing data and instructional resources across states and perhaps even across

nations. Linking assessments and data-sharing can offer more context to help

understand and interpret NAEP findings.

In addition, the Governing Board should consider the following themes in national conversations

surrounding education and assessment:

5. The nature and use of assessment:

What is the role of assessment to improve the quality of teaching and learning?

What is the appropriate role for the Governing Board to play in this dialogue?

Attachment C

5

16

6. Data privacy:

What are the concerns about data privacy surrounding assessment generally, and

is there a need for NAEP to respond to those concerns?

What public concerns about student privacy within NAEP might be raised by new

reporting and communications initiatives if, for example, the Governing Board

increases public attention on NAEP contextual variables or promotes an

assessment literacy initiative for parents, students, and policymakers?

7. The state of the Common Core State Standards and anti-testing sentiments (overlaps

with #1):

What is the relationship between NAEP and the Common Core State Standards?

How can the Governing Board leverage its unique position to add perspective on

the importance of NAEP and high quality assessments in the era of anti-testing

sentiment?

8. The relationship of NAEP to international assessments (overlaps with #4):

What is the relationship of NAEP to international assessments (e.g. Program for

International Student Assessment (PISA), Trends in International Mathematics

and Science Study (TIMSS), and Progress in International Reading Literacy Study

(PIRLS))?

Amidst this period of change and uncertainty, the Governing Board has the unique opportunity to

contribute to the national conversation on assessments, but also to shape that conversation; and

in doing so, help to ensure that NAEP remains relevant and adds value to the national dialogue

on education.

Overarching Goals for the Governing Board’s Future Work The Governing Board has identified the following tenets to ensure its Congressional mandate

serves as the foundation of the Strategic Planning Initiative. These Overarching Goals represent

the values that the Governing Board will uphold throughout the development and

implementation of its Strategic Plan.

Keep NAEP a Trusted Brand – Protect the reputation of the Governing Board and NAEP as

the gold standard for assessments.

Be a Good Steward of NAEP’s Assets – Sustain the important Governing Board work of

protecting data trends, state and Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) data, and

linkages with international assessments and administrative data.

Assess a Broad Range of Subjects – Ensure that the assessment schedule includes a diverse

set of subjects supported by dynamic frameworks, for example, U.S. History, Civics,

Science, Writing, Economics, TEL, the Arts, etc., NAEP extends beyond reading and

mathematics.

Continue Innovating for NAEP – Assess innovative content areas, for example TEL.

Advance item, task, and test design and implementation utilizing technology.

Improve Collaboration with NCES – Align and partner with NCES to provide the vital

leadership and resources needed to protect the future of NAEP.

Attachment C

6

17

Be a Voice in the National Conversation Surrounding Education and Assessment – Use

NAEP results to provoke public conversations about education and equitable outcomes.

For example, what is literacy in a digital world? How can the Governing Board focus on

the urgency of closing achievement gaps? What is the value of assessment?

Engage Key Constituencies Especially Parents, Educators, and Policy Makers – Increase

communications to key constituencies, including parents and advocacy groups, to better

understand, leverage, and support both NAEP and high quality assessments more generally.

Strategic Priorities The Governing Board will achieve its Overarching Goals through the Strategic Priorities, which

will be central to the Board’s Strategic Planning Initiative. The Strategic Priorities are not to be

considered ancillary or “add-ons” to NAEP activities. Instead, these priorities will guide the

Congressionally-mandated work of the Board. They are grouped below by their primary purpose;

however, these priorities are interrelated and accomplishing any one priority would contribute to

the success of others. The specific activities undertaken by the Governing Board to achieve the

four below-listed Strategic Priorities will be determined in Phase II and implemented in Phase III

of the Strategic Planning Initiative. The Strategic Priorities are:

1. Develop Messaging Strategies to Improve Understanding of NAEP within the Context

of High-Quality Assessments Generally

2. Increase Efficiencies to Effectively Use NAEP Funds

3. Innovate Assessment Design to Keep NAEP on the Forefront of Measuring Student

Achievement

4. Strengthen External Partnerships to Promote and Support the Resources NAEP Offers

Conclusion The Governing Board will develop its Strategic Plan by considering the key questions and

national trends as they apply to the Overarching Goals and Strategic Priorities described above.

The Strategic Plan will be guided by the values of parsimony, feasibility, and measureable

impact that make a difference in education progress. When designed and implemented, the

Strategic Plan will ensure that the Governing Board continues to play an important role in

informing policymakers, educators, and the public about student achievement in our nation.

The imperative for school improvement called for by the 1983 report, A Nation At Risk, that

carried through the bi-partisan legislation of the No Child Left Behind Act is giving way to the

emergence of a new era of education improvement efforts reflecting the demands for increased

academic rigor, technological sophistication, civic participation, and global perspectives that

define the early decades of the twenty-first century. The Governing Board accepts the challenge

to prepare students for their future, not our past, and to use assessments to inform the Board’s

progress to deliver on this commitment.

Attachment C

NAEP Budget and Assessment Schedule

At the August 2015 meeting, the National Assessment Governing Board unanimously approved a resolution to make a public statement advocating for full NAEP funding to protect the program.

The Governing Board reaffirmed its priorities for the NAEP Assessment Schedule, which are incorporated into the resolution by stating what might be lost (i.e. fewer subjects and grades assessed, fewer state and district results) with inadequate funding. The Board’s priorities are the following, in this order:

1. Transition to DBA and maintaining trend: state validation studies;

2. Assess broad-based curricular areas with a priority for STEM;

3. Provide state-level data in curriculum areas beyond reading and mathematics; and

4. Include more TUDAs.

At the August 2015 Board meeting, the Executive Committee met in closed session to receive updated NAEP budget costs and projections to implement the Assessment Schedule from Acting NCES Commissioner Peggy Carr. The Committee affirmed that likely modifications to the Assessment Schedule, jointly proposed by Governing Board staff and NCES, were a suitable reflection of the Board’s budget priorities in light of the tentative budget numbers.

At the November 2015 meeting, the Board will review revised costs and estimates for NAEP in closed session, review the Assessment Schedule, and take action on the NAEP Assessment Schedule if needed.

Attachment D

19

National Assessment of Educational Progress Schedule of Assessments Approved March 6, 2015 – Edited to show possible modifications due to budget constraints, as discussed at the August 2015 Board Meeting

Year Subject National Grades Assessed

State Grades Assessed

TUDA Grades

Assessed

2014 U.S. History* Civics* Geography* TECHNOLOGY AND ENGINEERING LITERACY

8 8 8 8

2015 Reading* Mathematics* Science**

4, 8, 12 4, 8, 12 4, 8, 12

4, 8 4, 8 4, 8

4, 8 4, 8

2016 Arts* 8 2017 Reading

Mathematics Writing

4, 8 4, 8 4, 8, 12

4, 8 4, 8

4, 8 4, 8

2018 U.S. History Civics Geography Technology and Engineering Literacy

8, 12 8, 12 8, 12 8

2019 Reading Mathematics Science High School Transcript Study

4, 8, 12 4, 8, 12 4, 8, 12

4, 8 4, 8

4, 8 4, 8

2020 Long-term Trend (postponed to 2024) ~ 2021 Reading

Mathematics Writing

4, 8 4, 8 4, 8, 12

4, 8 4, 8

8

4, 8 4, 8

2022 U.S. HISTORY CIVICS GEOGRAPHY Economics Technology and Engineering Literacy

8, 12 8, 12 8, 12

12 8, 12

2023 Reading Mathematics Science High School Transcript Study

4, 8, 12 4, 8, 12 4, 8, 12

4, 8 4, 8 4, 8

4, 8 4, 8 4, 8

2024 ARTS FOREIGN LANGUAGE Long-term Trend

8 12

~

NOTES: *Assessments not administered by computer. Beginning in 2017 all operational assessments will be digitally based. **Science in 2015 consisted of paper-and-pencil and digital-based components. ~Long-term Trend (LTT) assessments sample students at ages 9, 13, and 17 and are conducted in reading and mathematics. Subjects in BOLD ALL CAPS indicate the year in which a new framework is implemented or assessment year for which the

Governing Board will decide whether a new or updated framework is needed.

1. Transition to DBA and maintain trend: statevalidation studies

2. Assess broad-based curricular areas with apriority for STEM

3. Provide state level data in curriculum areasbeyond reading and mathematics

4. Include more TUDAs

Governing Board’s Priority Order for NAEP Activities:

Attachment D

20